IN THE IOWA SUPREME COURT

PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ) SUPREME COURT NO. 17-1579

THE HEARTLAND AND JILL )
MEADOWS, M.D., ) POLK CO. NO. EQCE081503
)
CLERK OF SUPREME COURT

Petitioners-Appellants )
v. ) MOTION FOR TEMPORARY
) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF/STAY
KIMBERLY K. REYNOLDS EX ) PENDING APPEAL
REL. STATE OF IOWA AND )
IOWA BOARD OF MEDICINE, ) EXPEDITED RELIEF
) REQUESTED
Respondents-Appellees )
)
OCT 07, 2017

COME NOW Petitioners-Appellants Planned Parenthood of the

Heartland, Inc. (PPH) and Jill Meadows, M.D., by and through their

attorneys, Rita Bettis of the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa

Foundation and Alice Clapman of Planned Parenthood Federation of

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

America, and respectfully submit this Motion for Temporary Injunction/Stay

Pending Appeal under Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.1502, for which they seek expedited

relief, and in support thereof state:

1. On May 3, 2017, Petitioners moved for temporary injunctive relief in

the district court upon learning that then-Governor Branstad intended to sign

into law what is now Iowa Code 146A (2017) (The Act).

1
2. Petitioners challenged the requirements of the Act that force all women,

regardless of how certain they are in their decision or their medical

circumstances, to make an additional, medically unnecessary trip to a health

center at least 72 hours before they can obtain an abortion. S.F. 471, 1

(2017); Iowa Code 146A.1 (2017). These needless and extremely onerous

requirements are among the strictest in the nation, and are imposed

regardless of the distance a woman must travel to reach her provider, her

ability to make an additional trip to the health center, her own medical

needs, her judgment, her doctors judgment, whether she is the victim or

sexual assault or intimate partner violence, or her individual life

circumstances.

3. The district court denied relief on May 4, 2017, and Petitioners

immediately sought an emergency stay from this Court. On May 5, 2017,

then Governor Branstad signed the Act, which went into effect immediately

upon signing, throwing the lives of 44 Iowa women with abortion

appointments pending that day into immediate chaos. Later that morning,

this Court temporarily stayed the Act and ordered parties to hold a final

hearing on the merits on an expedited basis, extending the stay until ten days

after the district court entered its final order in the case following that

hearing. Order, No. 17-7978 (Iowa May 9, 2017).

2
4. The district court held trial on July 17 and 18, 2017.

5. On September 29, 2017, the district court entered an order denying

Petitioners request for relief. Petitioners received notice of this order on

October 2, 2017.

6. Recognizing the practical problems that resulted after the legislation

briefly went into effect on short notice on May 5, 2017, the district court

granted its own stay of thirty days from the date of [its] decision to allow

the parties some additional time to seek a further stay from the supreme

court. Ruling on Petrs Pet. for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Sept. 29,

2017, at 46-47. Thus, the District Courts Stay of its own order allowing the

Act to take effect will expire on October 29, 2017.

7. On October 2, 2017, Petitioners filed Notice of Appeal of the underlying

decision on the merits. Subsequently, the Combined Certificate and

Transcript have been filed, and a Briefing Schedule set, with Petitioners

proof brief due on November 24, 2017.

8. Petitioners thus seek a further stay from this Court, to commence prior

to the expiration of that 30 day period on October 29, 2017, to continue to

protect the status quo of the parties during the duration of this appeal.

9. Under Iowa R. Civ. 1.1506(2), this Court may grant this request for a

stay of the district courts order pending the outcome of this appeal because

3
it is necessary to maintain the status quo of the parties prior to final

judgment and to protect the subject of the litigation. Kleman v. Charles

City Police Dept, 373 N.W.2d 90, 95 (Iowa 1985).

10. A further stay of the district courts order pending this appeal is

necessary in this case because it restrains Respondents from the

commission . . . of some act which would greatly or irreparably injure the

Petitioners. Iowa. R. Civ. Pro. 1.1502(1).

11. For the reasons set forth in Petitioners accompanying Brief in Support

of this Motion, Petitioners have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the

merits, that there is a threat of irreparable injury, and that the balance of

harms favors a stay. See generally Opat v. Ludeking, 666 N.W.2d 597, 603-

04 (Iowa 2003); Max 100 L.C. v. Iowa Realty Co., Inc., 621 N.W.2d 178,

181 (Iowa 2001).

WHEREFORE, Petitioners pray this Court act on an expedited basis

to stay the district courts order and enjoin Respondents from enforcing the

Acts mandatory delay and additional visit requirements.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Rita Bettis

RITA BETTIS (AT0011558)
American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa Foundation

4
505 Fifth Ave., Ste. 901
Des Moines, IA 503092316
Telephone: 515.207.0567
Fax: 515.243.8506
rita.bettis@aclu-ia.org

/s/ Alice Clapman

ALICE CLAPMAN*
Planned Parenthood Federation of America
1110 Vermont Ave., N.W., Ste. 300
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: (202) 973-4862
alice.clapman@ppfa.org

*Admitted pro hac vice in the Iowa District Court case; Motion for
admission pro hac vice in the Iowa Supreme Court case pending